reparations for
ceasing, from any land in Europe. It was a clear case, therefore, that,
howsoever Europe might please to dream upon the matter when pauperism
should have reached that glorious euthanasy predicted by the alchemist
of old and the economist of 1800, for the present she must deal actively
with her own pauperism on some avowed plan and principle, good or
evil--gentle or harsh. Accordingly, in the train of years between 1820
and 1830, enquiries were made of every separate state in Europe, what
_were_ those plans and principles. For it was justly said--"As one step
towards judging rightly of our own system, now that it has been so
clamorously challenged for a bad system, let us learn what it is that
other nations think upon the subject, but above all what it is that they
_do_." The answers to our many enquiries varied considerably; and some
amongst the most enlightened nations appeared to have adopted the good
old plan of _laissez faire_, giving nothing from any public fund to the
pauper, but authorizing him to levy contributions on that gracious
allegoric lady, Private Charity, wherever he could meet her taking the
air with her babes. This reference appeared to be the main one in reply
to any application of the pauper; and for all the rest they referred him
generally to the "ditch," or to his own unlimited choice of ditches,
according to the approved method of public benevolence published in 4to
and in 8vo by the man of 1800. But there were other and humbler states
in Europe, whose very pettiness had brought more fully within their
vision the whole machinery and watchwork of pauperism, as it acted and
re-acted on the industrious poverty of the land, and on other interests,
by means of the system adopted in relieving it. From these states came
many interesting reports, all tending to some good purpose. But at last,
and before the year 1830, amongst other results of more or less value,
three capital points were established, not more decisive for the
justification of the English system in administering national relief to
paupers, and of all systems that reverenced the authority of Scripture,
than they were for the overthrow of Mr M----, the man of 1800. These
three points are worthy of being used as buoys in mapping out the true
channels, or indicating the breakers on this difficult line of
navigation; and we now rehearse them. They may seem plain almost to
obviousness; but it is enough that they involve all the di